menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events Topic
Topic: Jenny Hall Jones suspends all fraternity activity indefinitely
Page: 6 of 11
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
10/10/2019 8:55 AM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
"no criminal behavior" eliminates things like underage drinking,assault,etc.
Is this true? Seems like there's a bit of an assumption being made there.

It could just as easily mean that they reviewed the complaints and there was nothing chargeable. It's illegal for a minor to possess alcohol. It's illegal for a minor to be intoxicated. Can you charge a minor because they were intoxicated last month? And can you charge somebody for providing alcohol to a minor unless you specifically know who purchased it and provided it?

I think you're probably concluding too much from that statement.
mail
person
Robert Fox
10/10/2019 8:59 AM
Meanwhile, the "anti-Greek" entourage is cheering this decision, as though the administration has acted ONLY with safety in mind. They are completely satisfied that all accusations are to be taken as gospel, and all are sufficiently serious as to require suspension of the ENTIRE IFC fraternal organization on campus.

Meanwhile, the accused remain dumbfounded. No information has been shared with them. If you are a junior or senior living in your fraternity house, you better find new accommodations--and do it damn fast. Afterall, the university has, effectively, shut your organization down. They've done this based upon "information" that they have received. They don't feel the need to share with you what that "information" is.

And the anti-frat community cheers. "Serves 'em right!" "Assholes!"

Isn't that what's really going on? Maybe not, but it sure is easy to see it that way.
mail
person
Ohio69
10/10/2019 9:06 AM
You don't have to look far away or far back in time to find a really big, beloved, nationally known, powerhouse of a university in Ohio suspending all 37 of its IFC chapters after just 11 allegations of misconduct. I assume in 2017 a group of The Ohio State University's IFC members, their alums, and some community members had some extreme reactions and conspiracy theories about the suspension and made sure everyone knew it. Had to, right? That's just how it is these days. Everyone is online and mad as hell and not going to take it anymore. After a review and reinstatement process somehow TOSU's greek system and the TOSU community at large survived. At least it seems so from the outside looking in. I was in that area recently and didn't hear much complaining about it. Wonder if the OHIO greeks and its alums and community at large can do the same? I guess only time will tell. I have my doubts. We seem to have a bit more bitter to us here at OHIO sometimes, if you know what I mean. Maybe a top 4 football team just overcomes everything and anything?

Anyway, I'm still looking forward to watching the 110 and the Alumni Band march in the parade (rain or shine) and some football and soccer this weekend. GO OHIO.
Last Edited: 10/10/2019 9:07:37 AM by Ohio69
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
10/10/2019 9:19 AM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
Meanwhile, the "anti-Greek" entourage is cheering this decision, as though the administration has acted ONLY with safety in mind. They are completely satisfied that all accusations are to be taken as gospel, and all are sufficiently serious as to require suspension of the ENTIRE IFC fraternal organization on campus.
I mean, you asked me specifically if that's how I felt. And I made it clear that I wasn't taking the accusations as gospel.

The point is that any accusations at all creates liability for the university and forces their hand here. The accusations may not be true. Totally possible. They may be true, but the frats may stay tight lipped and no evidence will be found. Also possible.

Either way, if a student died and the University was found to have received complaints about hazing and didn't act, that creates a huge amount of liability.

It's super simple, honestly. And we don't even have to debate the veracity or severity of the accusations. Somebody died, it made the University skittish. Here we are.
Last Edited: 10/10/2019 9:21:44 AM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
person
rpbobcat
10/10/2019 9:50 AM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
"no criminal behavior" eliminates things like underage drinking,assault,etc.
Is this true? Seems like there's a bit of an assumption being made there.

It could just as easily mean that they reviewed the complaints and there was nothing chargeable. It's illegal for a minor to possess alcohol. It's illegal for a minor to be intoxicated. Can you charge a minor because they were intoxicated last month? And can you charge somebody for providing alcohol to a minor unless you specifically know who purchased it and provided it?

I think you're probably concluding too much from that statement.
"No criminal behavior" is a pretty definitive statement from 2 seperate law enforcement agencies.

I would think if the hazing allegations involved something like underage drinking other potential criminal activity,APD and OUPD would have,at the very least, interviewed members of the accused fraternities.

From reading The Post articles and the posts here,it doesn't appear that APD or OUPD felt that was necessary.

So again,I wonder what exactly the hazing allegations were.
mail
person
Recovering Journalist
10/10/2019 10:32 AM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
"No criminal behavior" is a pretty definitive statement from 2 seperate law enforcement agencies.

I would think if the hazing allegations involved something like underage drinking other potential criminal activity,APD and OUPD would have,at the very least, interviewed members of the accused fraternities.

From reading The Post articles and the posts here,it doesn't appear that APD or OUPD felt that was necessary.

So again,I wonder what exactly the hazing allegations were.
Section C of the exact hazing policy clearly explains that a lot of non-criminal actions meet the university's standard of hazing. https://www.ohio.edu/policy/23-010

This is about possible policy violations and not (as yet) about any crime. Again, it's not that hard to see why the university is protecting itself by vigorously responding to allegations.
mail
person
Robert Fox
10/10/2019 10:51 AM
If the allegations are non-criminal in nature, why were they forwarded to APD?
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
10/10/2019 11:08 AM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
If the allegations are non-criminal in nature, why were they forwarded to APD?
I suspect there's all manner of gray area and they were forwarded as caution.

As a simple example, I know for a fact that a sorority at OU -- as part of their hazing for new pledges -- would have girls stand naked in front of the entire sorority and members would use sharpies to circle their imperfections and comment in degrading ways.

Let's say a complaint is filed about that behavior, and in that complaint there's ambiguity as to whether or not the pledge was coerced or forced to take part in that. Is that sexual assault?

I don't know the answer, but I don't think it's an easy one.
mail
person
rpbobcat
10/10/2019 11:38 AM
Recovering Journalist wrote:expand_more
"No criminal behavior" is a pretty definitive statement from 2 seperate law enforcement agencies.

I would think if the hazing allegations involved something like underage drinking other potential criminal activity,APD and OUPD would have,at the very least, interviewed members of the accused fraternities.

From reading The Post articles and the posts here,it doesn't appear that APD or OUPD felt that was necessary.

So again,I wonder what exactly the hazing allegations were.
Section C of the exact hazing policy clearly explains that a lot of non-criminal actions meet the university's standard of hazing. https://www.ohio.edu/policy/23-010

This is about possible policy violations and not (as yet) about any crime. Again, it's not that hard to see why the university is protecting itself by vigorously responding to allegations.
I'm not saying that the allegations don't meet O.U.'s definition of hazing.

The wording of hazing definition "a" is vague enough to cover almost anything.

I'm just saying that,given APD's and OUPD's conclusion that there was "no criminal behavior" ,it would be nice to know exactly what the allegations that resulted in a suspension of all IFC members were.

I wouldn't think that there would be a problem with JHJ issuing a statement identifying the nature of the allegations,with out getting too specific or naming the allegations against each fraternity.

I would think she could at least identify which of items O.U.'s policy identifies as hazing is alleged to have occurred.
Last Edited: 10/10/2019 11:57:55 AM by rpbobcat
mail
person
Robert Fox
10/10/2019 11:59 AM
rpbobcat wrote:expand_more
I wouldn't think that there would be a problem with JHJ issuing a statement identifying the nature of the allegations,with out getting too specific or naming the allegations against each fraternity.

I would think she could at least identify which of items O.U.'s policy identifies as hazing is alleged to have occurred.
Precisely. And that would do much to defuse this situation.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
10/10/2019 12:14 PM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
If the allegations are non-criminal in nature, why were they forwarded to APD?
Maybe the University wanted them to be? Again, agenda? Just speculating.
mail
person
BillyTheCat
10/10/2019 12:16 PM
Interesting that even though 3 sororities are now implicated there is not a broad ban on their activities until further notice.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
10/10/2019 12:29 PM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
I wouldn't think that there would be a problem with JHJ issuing a statement identifying the nature of the allegations,with out getting too specific or naming the allegations against each fraternity.

I would think she could at least identify which of items O.U.'s policy identifies as hazing is alleged to have occurred.
Precisely. And that would do much to defuse this situation.
The situation could be "diffused" just as easily by acknowledging the tough situation here and not rushing to judgment until facts have been explored and released.

Instead, we've got a conspiracy theory brewing that the Administration's acting in bad faith and this is a witch hunt to end Greek life forever. Without that assumption, what needs to be diffused, exactly?
mail
person
Robert Fox
10/10/2019 12:57 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
Without that assumption, what needs to be diffused, exactly?
The appearance (at the very least) of overreaction by the administration. Again, we can't know if it's overreaction or not until we have an idea what these accusations are. I get that you think the administration is left with no choice. I don't agree. They did not have to suspend these organizations until they did some digging. Then, when/if they have something they MUST respond to, they should do so with full explanation. The fact that they are keeping this under wraps does not help their cause.

Honestly, we're now going round and round with the same points. We'll just have to wait and see what this evidence amounts to.
mail
person
Robert Fox
10/10/2019 1:00 PM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
If the allegations are non-criminal in nature, why were they forwarded to APD?
Maybe the University wanted them to be? Again, agenda? Just speculating.
Bingo!
mail
person
cc-cat
10/10/2019 1:01 PM
At least it is keeping Matt Lauer from stealing all the headlines.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
10/10/2019 1:12 PM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
Without that assumption, what needs to be diffused, exactly?
The appearance (at the very least) of overreaction by the administration. Again, we can't know if it's overreaction or not until we have an idea what these accusations are. I get that you think the administration is left with no choice. I don't agree. They did not have to suspend these organizations until they did some digging. Then, when/if they have something they MUST respond to, they should do so with full explanation. The fact that they are keeping this under wraps does not help their cause.

Honestly, we're now going round and round with the same points. We'll just have to wait and see what this evidence amounts to.
Fair enough.

Though you all have now added a new point: that you think this is a conspiracy against the frats.

Maybe that'll play out to be the case. Who knows. But seems, I dunno, biased? Far fetched? And I'm not really clear how it helps anything at all to jump to that assumption. Even believing what you believe, isn't a much more logical explanation just that the University handled this clunkily?
Last Edited: 10/10/2019 1:12:38 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
person
Robert Fox
10/10/2019 1:18 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
Even believing what you believe, isn't a much more logical explanation just that the University handled this clunkily?
Yes. I believe you're probably right about that, which is pretty much the argument I started off with. But, I still hold open the possibility that the admin is acting with bias.
mail
person
MonroeClassmate
10/10/2019 7:31 PM
The 110 too!
mail
person
Bobcatzblitz
10/10/2019 7:49 PM
https://www.athensnews.com/news/campus/marching-ordered-t...
mail
The Optimist
10/10/2019 9:00 PM
So now we’ve got multiple sororities, a professional business organizations and the Marching 110 with hazing allegations but Jenny Hall Jones felt that singling out the fraternities was an appropriate decision? Apparently the “systematic problems” are much deeper than we were led to believe.

This has been very poorly handled.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
10/10/2019 9:33 PM
The Optimist wrote:expand_more
So now we’ve got multiple sororities, a professional business organizations and the Marching 110 with hazing allegations but Jenny Hall Jones felt that singling out the fraternities was an appropriate decision? Apparently the “systematic problems” are much deeper than we were led to believe.

This has been very poorly handled.
Isn't the logical conclusion that the dam just broke on reports of hazing? This brought attention to the issue and made it clear how to submit a complaint. And people seem to have done so.

By the way, notably absent in this entire thread is anybody arguing hazing doesn't take place in any of these organizations. There's anger about the handling, the messaging, conspiracy theories that this is just anti-frat bias. But nobody naive enough to argue there isn't hazing.

Sort of telling, right?
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
10/10/2019 9:38 PM
Robert Fox wrote:expand_more
Meanwhile, the accused remain dumbfounded. No information has been shared with them.
According to the Athens News, this isn't true. Not only has info been shared with them, but there is a date set (10/16) by which reinstatement plans will be submitted, and each fraternity has a university advisor working with them on those plans.

Where have you seen it reported that no information has been shared with them?
mail
person
BillyTheCat
10/11/2019 7:04 AM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
Meanwhile, the accused remain dumbfounded. No information has been shared with them.
According to the Athens News, this isn't true. Not only has info been shared with them, but there is a date set (10/16) by which reinstatement plans will be submitted, and each fraternity has a university advisor working with them on those plans.

Where have you seen it reported that no information has been shared with them?
Not sure where you get that! The action plan and the University Advisor is only for those who are suspended but not under investigation. And no where does that article say those bodies have been informed.

“Regarding the suspension of the University’s 15 Interfraternity Council (IFC) organizations, an action plan for reinstatement is underway for all chapters not currently under a Cease and Desist order from CSSR," Leatherwood wrote. "Those chapters have been given permission to hold planning meetings and must submit their reinstatement plans by Wednesday, Oct. 16, for university approval. Chapter advisers are encouraged to assist their chapters with this process
mail
person
rpbobcat
10/11/2019 7:20 AM
This morning I read the O.U. Policy Statement on hazing that BLSOS posted.

Unless I missed it,I didn't see anything that requires a fraternity or other organization to be issued a "cease and desist" order, based on any allegation of hazing.

I would think that O.U. has some latitude with the "cease and desist" order, based on the nature of the hazing,the accusing party puts forth in the "Incident Reporting Form".

Even if you submit anonymously,you still describe what you are alleging occurred.

Right now,I think they're gonna issue a "Cease ans Desist" order based on any hazing allegation.

Just wonder if they have ability not to.

Also wonder what would have happened if the members of the 110 didn't get Academic Credit ?
Can't imagine the reaction if there was no 110 in the parade or halftime tomorrow.
Showing Messages: 126 - 150 of 265
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)